Vinyl vs high def audio i.e. 24bit / 96 or 192khz

On a side note, anyone a Celtic music fan? I almost listen exclusively to Celtic music. Here are some artists I listen to:

Loreena McKennitt
Enaid --  Avalon - A Celtic Legend
Méav Ní Mhaolchatha
Enya

I also have some albums from Sara Brightman & The Carpenters. I know The Carpenters definitely have "real" LPs, but those Celtic artists may not have "true" LP releases. I am not expert enough to figure out whether those out there are just from digital conversion or real analog press. If I manage to pick up some true analog LPs for the above mentioned artists, I may invest in a system. Certainly, any recommendations to other good Celtic music is strongly appreciated. 

Dear @millercarbon :: """  Vinyl is so much better than digital its silly to even talk about, as that can't be done without assuming they are comparable, when they aren't. One is music, the other noise. A whole lot of people miss this, because the noise of vinyl is so obvious. The noise with digital is woven right into the signal. With digital its silly even to talk about signal to noise ratio. With digital the signal IS the noise!  """

what's silly is try to ridicule digital alternative with your riculous statements because things are that all can be or can be changed the other way around for any one but a silly person.

Where are your facts or the foundations for what you posted other that: "" that's what I like it ""

At least try to post something that can be " coherent ". MUSIC is some kind of " noise " too.


R.

@angelz if you are looking for good Celtic music in LP you need to go back to the 60s, 70s and 80s.  Labels like Tara, Fontana, Dara, would be good places to look.

Angel, I think Atmasphere has some substantial arguments in favor of vinyl. Breaking down into the simplest terms, older music that was recorded well and in analog is generally going to sound better than CD quality. There is plenty of fantastic old stuff. Newer music recorded in digital and mastered with High res in mind is hard to beat. If the CD master is used dynamic compression is forced to the max and everything has the same volume which is not real but it sounds great on a car radio. Most everything prior to 1980 is analog. 
In the end you are going to have to make up your mind by yourself. Get one of the less expensive Rega tables and an Ortofon Blue cartridge when you get the disease go for broke.

Dear @angelgz2  : I like analog and I like digital but I try to not be " stupid " about the digital alternative or been sticky with analog to end of the times. And I'm not stupid because first than all I'm a music lover as you are.

The arguments that post and posted the " irreversible " analog persons are just opinions with no solid facts/foundation true facts..

Speak about aliasing in digital as if today been the 70's when we are living in 2019 and through very advanced aliasing filters that digital problem just disappeared years ago.

In other threads where some of the same persons that posted here posted " there " I posted ( several times with facts fron scientific source. ) that all human beens listen sound through our ears/brain at the inner ear where the SPL waves pass through an inner ear ADC, yes we listen in the digital domain not analog.

If we convert in bits the analog information in a LP it goes only to: 122-14 bits, never approaces 16bits as CD's.

A often " problem with digital information is exactly that:  The format is a two-channel 16-bit PCM encoding at a 44.1khz ( sampling rate: 22.05khz. ):

analog advocates say frequency response in CD is limited against LP that can goes say: 40khz or whatever.
But that fact is useless for support LP superiority over digital alternative because over that high frequency range exist no single fundamental music NOTES but only harmonics that are a seria certain development that it's easy covered inside the oversampling proccess that can give the CD a more true extended high frequency range and that's at 16bits but today DAC's comes with 32/768 technology ! ! a native not 32 bits but 24/96 or 192 outperforms totally any analog alternative, no matters what.

But exist a major disadvantage with the analog LP recordings and is that even that the recording microphones pick up the signal in stereo way down to the lowest bass  frequency range things are that for LP limitations and during the LP cutting proccess that bass range stereo signal is converted to mono fashion and obviously along its harmonics that are the ones that affects all the whole frequency range and the main harmonics for a pristine quality performance.
In the digital domain that just does not happens because what we have in the CD's is what the recording microphones pick up: everything including harmonics in STEREO fashion as must be always.

There are a lot of facts against analog and in favor of digital but is useless to say about when people just don't understand the reality they and us are living with.

The main issue/subject is not whom has the reason or whom wins the subject is to understand all those facts true facts I posted here and if I'm wrong ( because I can be wrong. ) I invite any one to post why I'm wrong with facts to prove it.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.